Catholic group seeks to defend gay marriage ban
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
A Chicago-based public interest law group that opposes same-sex marriage has filed a motion in Cook County Circuit Court asking to intervene and defend the state’s marriage law against a pair of lawsuits filed in May.
The lawsuits — filed by the gay rights group Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois — claim the state’s ban on same-sex marriage violates the Illinois Constitution’s equal protection and due process clauses.
Because the Cook County state’s attorney and the Illinois attorney general have said they agree with the lawsuits, it was expected that outside groups would attempt to step in and defend the state’s ban on gay marriage.
The Thomas More Society filed its motion late Friday on behalf of two downstate county clerks, Christie Webb of Tazewell County and Kerry Hirtzel of Effingham County.
The motion notes that 15 of the 25 plaintiffs in the lawsuits do not actually reside in Cook County, yet they all sought marriage licenses in Cook County and filed the suit solely against Cook County Clerk David Orr.
“You’ve got plaintiffs from all over the state, claiming that they were going to come to Chicago to get marriage licenses, when they should’ve gone to their own county clerks and sued their own county clerks,” said Peter Breen, the society’s executive director and legal counsel. “This is just legal sleight of hand to get a friendly clerk to roll over.”
The intervention motion is set for a hearing Tuesday morning.
SOURCE
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
May 22, 2013 1:37
Tornadoes exact deadly toll; region needs ‘a lot of prayers right now’
-
May 22, 2013 1:32
State Dept. report says countries have repressed religious freedom with laws
-
May 22, 2013 1:23
2 lawsuits filed against Maine Catholic church
-
May 21, 2013 1:32
Church Whistle-Blowers Join Forces on Abuse
-
May 20, 2013 5:17
Maine Catholic church closing its doors
-
May 20, 2013 5:14
Muslim leaders in US facing challenges inside and outside the faith
-
May 17, 2013 5:43
Archbishop clarifies remarks about Cuomo
-
May 17, 2013 5:40
Fr. Gary Meier goes public with clergy experience
-
May 17, 2013 5:37
Predator priests paid to pray for unsuspecting families
-
May 16, 2013 1:56
Cleanup of Bridgeport, Conn., diocese begins in earnest
14 Comments
This makes us Catholics look so bad. Our focus has becomes so myopic when we have serious issues to resolve. Family stability will not improve by this attack on couples desires to live in committed relationships. We need to help families of any sort stay together in loving homes
We do NOT wish to attack people who wish to live in a committed relationship! How many people have gone out of their way to explain this!
We are defending the core definition of marriage as our Lord has defined it and as St. Paul has commented on it. I refer you to the post in answer to Tony for a further explanation.
You infer that allowing homosexual communities to have so-called marriages would help the overall stability of families. However, I truly have seen all four combinations: good/bad heterosexual families, good/bad homosexual families. Allowing the redefinition of marriage does nothing for that.
I agree: we _do_ need to help families to stay together. To say that something is called something else just because the person wants it that way is at least childish and at most insane. Imagine arguing with your significant other with you saying that the sky is actually orange instead of blue. Same difference in the “debate” about the definition of marriage.
Have you looked at the deplorable state of families today? Toddlers being raised by day care agencies while mommy goes off to work, necessary yes but too bad. Have you seen the high degree of separation and divorce? Have you noticed how many families are able to spend any quality time together even for meals? Have you noticed the high degree of addiction among family members today? The stAte of heterosexual marriage today is deplorable.
I ask, what are we as a church doing to help?
Well, Tony, since you are a member of the Church, let me ask you: what are you doing to help?
Well for one thing I raise the issues, second I serve on the family life committee for the diocese and third I try to encourage a simpe lifestyle for all. No one can do everything but all of us can do something.
Okay, Tony, just checking.
With more and more high calibr men and women like Anderson Cooper coming out as gay, gays should be allowed to get “married.”
Tony — your assertion, of course, is not consistent with Catholic teaching, nor will it ever be;
I was just wondering, poligamy was practiced in the early Hebrew Scripures and through the centuries evolved into one man and one woman. Our culture and our society are accepting same sex marriages.
Some scripture scholars are suggesting that the scriptures that mention homosexuality are more about inhospitality.
Some mainline Christian communities are open to same sex marriage we really don’t know the cause for homosexual orientation.
So, I guess I am suggesting that in time the church maybe more accepting of gay marriage.
I do acknowledge that right now the church teaches that the only marriages may be between a man and a woman.
Grass grows up from the ground. Trees do too. Yet you would be called incorrect if you tried to assert that a blade of grass was actually a tree or visa versa. Just so, the Catholic Church has a very precise definition of marriage which is backed up by multiple verses within the books of the Bible, from both Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament. One of the parts of the definition of marriage pertains to children. How can two members of the same sex procreate?
Besides, IF the government – which has already called a penalty a tax – redefines marriage, what’s next? Redefine Church, redefine “true presence”, redefine “Catholic Church”?
there will be no new understanding of homosexuality in the future that will make the Church change its position.
Regardless of any biologic proclivities, the fact is that choosing to have gay sex is a choice –
– even if the choice is easier for some than others.
Some people are dealth a hand that makesit easy for them to become alcoholics — but that does not mean that being an alcoholic is therefore acceptable.